Who cares about the long gun registry?

[iridebikes]

are we to believe that the majority of lapsed licenses are not due to the owner's inaction?

do you have any stats to show how prevalent this is, or is it solely anecdotal?

Im a gun owner, I communicate with other gun owners much like I communicate with other motorcyclists here at GTAM. It is well known in the 'community' of firearms owners that renewal papers often come late or are processed late/never received by the CFC thus resulting in suspended/expired licenses. Obviously there are no statistics kept on this matter, its just something thats already well known to us gun owners. Those of us with access to the internet and the know-how to communicate with eachother are aware of the issue, obviously, and are vigilant about it... but there are millions of other firearms owners in Canada who aren't connected or savvy enough to be part of the online community, and they're left in the dark.

 

[turbodish]

Look at the crime rates/murder rates. The states that have less firearms restrictions are generally safer than the ones that have more firearms restrictions. Is it any wonder states like Florida have seen their crime rates drop once they started allowing C+C?

Florida ranks 4th worst in the US as far as per capita violent crime is concerned, according to 2006 stats from the US Census Bureau.

 

[Icbones]

Im a gun owner, I communicate with other gun owners much like I communicate with other motorcyclists here at GTAM. It is well known in the 'community' of firearms owners that renewal papers often come late or are processed late/never received by the CFC thus resulting in suspended/expired licenses. Obviously there are no statistics kept on this matter, its just something thats already well known to us gun owners. Those of us with access to the internet and the know-how to communicate with eachother are aware of the issue, obviously, and are vigilant about it... but there are millions of other firearms owners in Canada who aren't connected or savvy enough to be part of the online community, and they're left in the dark.

Agreed. There are a couple of yahoos posting on this subject that don't have a clue about our gun laws or the double standards applied to firearm owners. A couple of the posters remind me of the character squealer in Orwell's novel, Animal Farm. They always spout up in defense of the government.

 

[roadhamr]

I voted yes.
Not because I really care whether or not guns get registered (not being a gun owner, it doesn't affect me).
But I think it is important because it explifies and brings to light many issues in our society; one being general freedoms and rights to personal property, another being the level of government intrusion into the lives of private citizens, and most important to me, is that it highlights the excessive wastefulness of government function and makes one of the strongest possible arguments for small government.

couldnt say it any better myself. thank you for thinking about your post and making it an intelligent one.

 

[afong56]

I believe that we have a fundamental right to own property, especially items which we may use to defend ourselves (another inherent right).

you might believe that, but where is it actually stated in our constitution, or charter of rights and freedoms? firearms act?

you must have us confused with the u.s.--we're not americans.

 

[Duster929]

To be honest, I'd have no problem with that unless you've shown in your past to have a violent criminal history or a medical issue which would prevent you from exercising sound judgement.


We need less bans, and more personal responsibility.

Sounds like a wise policy.

 

[CruisnGrrl]

Now I KNOW you work for the government. Your first post talked about millions, and suddenly that's turned into billions!

my bad, when writing about the millions being spent per year I was also thinking about the total being spent in the billions. Either way it's a hell of a lot of money.

 

[promac]

Perhaps a better question would have been "Who cares about how the government spends your (the taxpayers) money?" or "Who cares about their rights and the rights of others?". Most would be inclined to say that they don't care about the long gun registry because it doesn't affect them. However, this complacency overlooks a huge breach of people's most basic and fundamental rights - affirmation that the loss of rights is acceptable. One day, government may restrict the usage of motorcycles or ban them outright. Proponents will say "We banned guns........why not motorcycles?". For those of you who haven't realized it, people in Canada have no right to property. It can be taken from you without compensation at the unfettered discretion of the courts, government or Governor in Council. They've done it before and they'll continue to do it. Peoples rights relating to privacy and unreasonable search and seizure are breached under the veil of legislative inspection powers or public safety. The right to protect yourself and your property are undermined by denying a person access to the tools to do so. Under the Firearms Act, those most basic and fundamental rights are breached. Scrapping the long gun registry is just one tiny step back in the right direction.

 

[promac]

I believe that we have a fundamental right to own property, especially items which we may use to defend ourselves (another inherent right). Having said that, a license is a reasonable restriction imho but not when it may lapse over a period of time. You are either properly trained or not, it should be a one time thing. I have a problem with the registry being used for confiscation in this case. A firearms owner who's license has lapsed is NOT a risk to society, it's a paper crime. A simple reminder or even an automatic renewal (hook it up to an income tax refund or something!) would be a much simplier solution.

If we are licenced and up to date, why can't we carry in public? Or shoot handguns on our private property? There are so many unnecessary restrictions put on firearms owners when the data shows we are simply not a danger to society.

IMO, once an individual is licenced, that licence should be good for life or until revoked. The same should occur for the classification of firearms. If you purchased the firearm legally as a particular class, it should remain in that class for the balance of its existence. Registration should not be necessary unless you intend to carry a loaded firearm open or concealed for protection of life and property.

 

[mat2312]

you might believe that, but where is it actually stated in our constitution, or charter of rights and freedoms? firearms act?

you must have us confused with the u.s.--we're not americans.

Try the English Bill of Rights, which our entire society is based on. Keep in mind the Constitution is not a document which can take away rights, only protect existing ones.

 

[mat2312]

IMO, once an individual is licenced, that licence should be good for life or until revoked. The same should occur for the classification of firearms. If you purchased the firearm legally as a particular class, it should remain in that class for the balance of its existence. Registration should not be necessary unless you intend to carry a loaded firearm open or concealed for protection of life and property.

+1 sensible firearms legislation is what we need. What we're getting is fear mongering and people relying on emotion to set policy.

 

[Onagoth]

Just so you guys all are aware.

The Canadian Firearms Program and licensing system in Canada involves what's called a continously eligibility system. Any time a criminal charge, car accident, assault, domestic complaint, etc appears, then the person's license validity is instantly called into question.

If you couple that with the fact that renewals are free, the question does come up.

Why do licenses expire?

 

[Duster929]

Just so you guys all are aware.

The Canadian Firearms Program and licensing system in Canada involves what's called a continously eligibility system. Any time a criminal charge, car accident, assault, domestic complaint, etc appears, then the person's license validity is instantly called into question.

If you couple that with the fact that renewals are free, the question does come up.

Why do licenses expire?

Probably to make an effort to keep people current and well-trained. If you haven't used your firearm in a long time, such that you haven't bothered to renew your license, then it's better to have the license expire. After it's expired, if you want to get it again, do you have to do any re-training or re-testing?

 

[iridebikes]

Renewals have absolutely nothing to do with training. Its a piece of paper.

 

[Duster929]

Renewals have absolutely nothing to do with training. Its a piece of paper.

If your license has expired, and you need a new license, all you have to do is get a piece of paper?

 

[iridebikes]

You have to re-apply and go through the paperwork again. At no point do you receive training.

I suppose you can call it a 'refresher' in a sense... if you need a 'refresher' to remind you not to point guns in an unsafe direction or keep them loaded under your pillow, that is.

 

[mat2312]

If your license has expired, and you need a new license, all you have to do is get a piece of paper?

BINGO! You cut your cheque and sign the form. Then put it in the mailbox.

 

[skip]

I think the renewal fees are waived now as well. It really is send in the form and pray they process it. Just paper pushing.

edit - only until next May and then its $60 again.

 

[promac]

Yes, renewal fees are waived at this point in time. There is no additional safety training or proof of competency required. However, you do need to have your spouse or significant other acknowledge your application by signing your application or they will call. That and some questions relating to mental instability risk factors.

 

[afong56]

Try the English Bill of Rights, which our entire society is based on. Keep in mind the Constitution is not a document which can take away rights, only protect existing ones.

so you cite an english document and expect it to apply in canada?

lol, try again. or do you not recognize canada as a sovereign nation?

canada's constitution and charter of rights and freedoms clearly delineate the rights afforded to us as canadian citizens. what you stated is not contained in either.

furthermore, limitations can and are placed on our rights as outlined by the canadian criminal code, and the firearms act specifically. if any section of the criminal code or firearms act (or any legislation, for that matter) was found to be inconsistent with the 1982 constitution, it would be struck down.

so obviously, the 'rights' that you think exist and should be protected aren't legitimate.